Is camber fixed? Discuss it here.

[Voodoovaj]

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Let's ask Wiki, that great repository of information of our age.

"A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation."

Oh cool, that's exactly what I meant.



On an oval, are the tyres on both sides of the car doing equal amounts of work?

I rather think that the outside tyres are doing a lot more work than the inside ones, and looking at the heat in them tends to confirm this. As such, if you had to run a symmetrical setup you'd have one that was more ideal for the outside tyres, as you're going to see more benefit from that than one that tries to treat both sides of the car as equal.



And no, I haven't tried super_gt's test yet.

On an oval, the inside tire is weighted by gravity. It will be gripping more than it would on a flat turn.

If you have negative camber on both sides of the front on a banked corner, the outside tire's thrust inward will not be able to overcome the inside tire's thrust outward.

Since the car is already wanting to move to the outside, that inside time doesn't need much traction to counteract the camber thrust from its opposing wheel.

So, let's say you have a car with 0 body roll regardless of load, like an active suspension car. Camber will be useless in that case.

If you really want to test camber, get something that still likes to roll on its adjustable suspension, like the Silvia K's Dia Selection (it's the premium Silvia K). Go to Big Willow with it. There, that outside camber thrust can do its thing.

This is also why putting the same amount of camber front and rear is a bad strategy. If the outside rear tire with high camber does it's job, the car should resist turning.

 

[Imari]

If you have negative camber on both sides of the front on a banked corner, the outside tire's thrust inward will not be able to overcome the inside tire's thrust outward.

So what happens in that case? You wouldn't be able to turn and you'd plow into the outside wall?

That's easy to test in game. It doesn't happen.
It's also easy to test in real life with any banked corner of reasonable length. It also doesn't happen.

So, let's say you have a car with 0 body roll regardless of load, like an active suspension car. Camber will be useless in that case.

Good job the vast majority of cars don't have active suspension then. So most cars will find camber useful. Like I said.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The thing I find odd, is the people saying camber works, are talking about gaining a tenth or so around a race track. I'm sorry but unless you're Jenson Button, you won't be able to lap consistently enough to verify what exactly causes a 1 or 2 tenth difference between laps on 99% of the circuits on GT6.

Also, using a car you aren't familiar with, or which someone else has set up, presumably to suit THEIR driving style, also will not give you any measure of consistency.

I decided, in order to test camber, I needed the most basic circuit. So an oval. It obviously had to be motegi, so as to have as flat a surface as possible (the concave surface of the banking at daytona would give far too many variables depending on line). The corners are both perfect for testing camber, as they are fast, but not flat out in most cars, and they have a continuous radius, which will allow you to load up your outside tyres, and easily find the limit of their grip.

Then I needed a car, so I chose a car I had been testing for weeks for an upcoming online race series. Having done at least a thousand laps with this car, and having found a set up I was happy with, I figured I was familiar enough with the car to be certain I was going to have the required consistency. This car also had understeer as it's limiting factor, so there was no need to test combinations of front and rear camber, if camber worked at all, adding front camber would have produced significantly improved front mid corner grip, as it would prevent the tyre rolling to it's outside shoulder, maintaining it's contact patch with the road mid corner.

I have no bias towards 0/0 tunes, despite believing them to be fastest. I love using camber in tunes on other sims, and really REALLY want it fixed on gt so I can use it again.

There was no improvement in grip with camber, and the more I added, the lower mid corner speeds I was able to achieve, and the harder it became to maintain the inside line.

I ran racing soft tyres, so best front grip possible from the rubber, removing rear grip wouldn't help mid corner grip.
I also don't know where anyone would get the idea that camber works better with softer, standard road car suspension, than with rock solid race car suspension. You guys should probably tell the formula one teams they've got camber all wrong! lol.

Also, saying it works because you found 2 tenths with 0.3 front camber over 0 is ridiculous. Not only for the fact that unless you only ran one or two continuous radius corners with that lap time, not a full technical course, your extra time could be achieved by simply getting one corner a bit better than the last time, but also for the fact that 0/0 camber should always be SIGNIFICANTLY slower EVERYWHERE, than high camber set ups, and if camber worked, the ideal range for race cars with high grip racing tyres would be anywhere between 2.0 to 5.0, not 0.0 to 0.5.

Trust me, I wish I had've come to a different conclusion, it really sucks that it doesn't work. But for me, until I can find a SIGNIFICANT change in the handline, for the positive, using camber, it doesn't work. I am ALWAYS faster with 0/0, and I spend 90% of my time on gt6 tuning.

I think you hit the nail on the head. If camber was working properly or as it does in real life, or at all, you'd see clear and unmistakable gains in time on the track. A tenth or two is nothing, could easily be human error. Outside of one or two tests where a tenth or two was gained, most of the testing that I can see has shown zero gains from camber regardless of what level of camber was used.

Having said that, and as I said earlier, according to the Motec Data, camber clearly has an effect, it does increase minimum cornering speeds by a small amount. However, it's not enough of an advantage to overcome the trait of a zero camber tune to get on the throttle earlier and providing a higher average speed on the straights and a higher terminal speed before the next corner. Again, the data was pretty clear on that as well. It's well known that in GT5/6, again as has been mentioned here as well, that corner exit speed and getting on the throttle as early as possible is the single biggest factor in achieving alien speed. Take an alien's replay from any TT, compare it to yours (not you personally of course), and you will see consistently, that they are on the throttle before you are in every single corner, provided you are not also an alien.

Like you I also wished I had come to a different conclusion. I was really looking forward to developing my tuning garage for GT6, I put a lot of effort into the spit and polish of my presentation to get the most out of my very limited artistic skills. Once I realized that ride height was still messed up, camber didn't work and it seemed the rest of the settings didn't matter much, it took the wind out of my tuning sails pretty quickly. I think I finished around #50 in the SSR5 Seasonal with this tune and felt no excitement at all because the tuning was just a matter of figuring out videogame exploits as opposed to real world tuning. I did one more tune a few weeks later and that was it for me, it just wasn't fun to be doing "video game" tuning.

 

[photonrider]

If you have negative camber on both sides of the front on a banked corner, the outside tire's thrust inward will not be able to overcome the inside tire's thrust outward.

^Are you telling me someone actually is 'scientifically' contesting this concept?



All right, I'll go away before the laugh police get here too.


________________________________________

For the confused:

One of the ways crew chiefs generate grip is with camber.

OK, we’re in the corner, foot to the floor, feeling our car trying to go straight because of the tremendous lateral force on the outside pair. Here’s where it gets magical.

The right-side wheels have a touch of negative camber, while the inside wheels have positive camber. The right side tires are always on the outside on an oval track, and as such provide more grip with some negative camber. The inside tires, which always lose grip when cornering, use the positive camber to catch up with the outsides in grip.

With the evolution of the Gen-6 car, NASCAR also allowed teams a limited amount of camber in the right rear to help it turn. Contrary to popular belief, there’s not a whole lot of flex in the steel tube-frame chassis the sport requires, and that means physics are having their way with the car in the middle of the corner.

With limited flex, the force is unable to transfer and results in a pushing condition. Pushing is when you turn the wheel left and the car just keeps on going to the right. Road-racers call it understeer; NASCAR folk call it “pushing like a dump truck.”

Camber is a great addition to the crew chief’s tool kit, but like most magic bullets, it can backfire.

If you put too much camber in either way, you’ll run the risk of damaging the tires. Racing tires, like the Goodyear Eagles the NASCAR Sprint Cup and Nationwide Series use, are constructed with all this in mind, but there are limits.

http://www.nascar.com/en_us/news-me...technology-camber-atlanta-motor-speedway.html

 

[Mike_grpA]

An oval is fine for testing camber when it has very little to no banking, so motegi is fine. I actually said that in my post if you had read it.

I agree with JP 100% on how broken the tuning in gt is. I'm a huge car nerd, and love fine tuning. Have read tons on race car engineering and tuning. Nothing from my real world knowledge helps when I tune cars for gt6.

In order to be quick enough around ssr5 to win an online race I was practicing for, I ended up with a tune that had max front downforce/min rear, max rear spring rate/min front, and a ridiculous amount of negative rear toe. A real car with this set up would be impossible to drive, it would constantly swap ends. The merc 190E touring car loved it. It had great front grip, and beautiful rotaation, and also was excellent on tyre wear. I won the race very convincingly.

I'm looking forward to getting a new pc so I can get into more realistic sims, but I have always loved gt games, since I was a kid. It's just such a shame to see it not progressing into the realistic sim I had hoped it to be.

 

[FOG-Smokebeer]

Nicely put Mike I don't think most the setups I use in gt6 would work on the few pc games I got. A tenth or 2 doesn't really matter I spent ages going around brands indy a few weeks ago alone waiting for my online room to come alive
and couldn't gain any time until my arms starting aching so i lowerd the FFB settings on the t500rs in game to 1/2 and gained a full second on a lap time of only 48s I think that's a lot more to stress over

 

[Ridox2JZGTE]

I guess I'm lucky not to follow the crazy extreme tuning I set my limit when tuning/driving in GT6 ( while building replicas or simply wanted realistic performance car ), never tune to exceed what a real car could ever do. When you start to aim for top leaderboard or front pack of online race where everyone has the same line of thought, then you start using all the tricks, all the exploits, all the bugs in the imperfect physics of a sim.This is the problem, GT6 allows too many advantage with it's many bug / poorly balanced parameter : like ride height, aero, and overly grippy racing tires ( above RH ). Most race cars have to much aero value IMO.

I found interesting use of spring rates IRL - Ferrari 458 Italia, the GT3 and Challenge use the opposite rate value for both axle. One has higher rear, the other has higher front and both when built in GT6 drives quite similar when realistically tuned. The BMW Z4 GT3 also surprisingly uses totally different rate arrangement than even stock setup of GT6 and it worked on both stock weight distribution and the real car distribution ( achievable only with BOP weight )

Fix the ride height, reduce peak lateral G's of all tires to more realistic level, lower aero values of race cars that have it + fix the drag and we have a start of better sim.

 

[Mike_grpA]

well put 2jz, I'll also add they need to properly simulate tyre temp and pressure, which is probably a lot of the problem with the useless camber. Any sim these days should have a solid tyre model. I expected gt6 to have a great one, after all the talk about developing one with yokohama.

 

[0ldman279]

THEN @0ldman279 goes on to explain that a properly implemented camber model would not be a simple camber=more grip on it's own, and he's wrong too.

Then please explain it to me.

Negative camber is used to keep the as much of the tire in contact with the road as possible, simplified, but there it is.

Camber is no different than any other part of a car. If you tune one portion without adjusting those associated (camshaft with no intake/exhaust changes, cam + intake + exhaust + compression with stock gears) then you don't meet your goal.

If the suspension is rigid, less camber is needed. If the suspension is sloppy, you'll need more camber, but it won't matter anyway. The middle is where it is at, weight transfer, suspension geometry does it's thing, right amount of negative camber dialed in and your tire keeps you on the asphalt.

Quite the opposite of a few cars I've worked on from the 70s, where loading the front suspension produces positive camber and understeer. Not one of Ford's better ideas.

I think it was hit on earlier in this thread, I think it is safe to assume that PD did not allow for camber to properly change due to upper/lower control arm geometry. The 1971 Mustang shouldn't have as much grip as it does braking into a turn, but I'm kind of splitting hairs at this point.

 

[Imari]

For the confused:




http://www.nascar.com/en_us/news-me...technology-camber-atlanta-motor-speedway.html

How does that relate to what Voodoovaj was saying? Your link is describing an asymmetric setup, he was describing a symmetric one.

You'll have to spell out why what he's saying is correct in simpler terms. If I'm wrong, then I'd like to know so that I can make sure I'm thinking about camber correctly. But it needs to be explained, simply saying "it's like this" is no good if I don't understand why.

 

[Stotty]

Fix the ride height, reduce peak lateral G's of all tires to more realistic level, lower aero values of race cars that have it + fix the drag and we have a start of better sim.

Perfect

 

[CSLACR]

I think you hit the nail on the head. If camber was working properly or as it does in real life, or at all, you'd see clear and unmistakable gains in time on the track. A tenth or two is nothing, could easily be human error. Outside of one or two tests where a tenth or two was gained, most of the testing that I can see has shown zero gains from camber regardless of what level of camber was used.

Having said that, and as I said earlier, according to the Motec Data, camber clearly has an effect, it does increase minimum cornering speeds by a small amount. However, it's not enough of an advantage to overcome the trait of a zero camber tune to get on the throttle earlier and providing a higher average speed on the straights and a higher terminal speed before the next corner. Again, the data was pretty clear on that as well. It's well known that in GT5/6, again as has been mentioned here as well, that corner exit speed and getting on the throttle as early as possible is the single biggest factor in achieving alien speed. Take an alien's replay from any TT, compare it to yours (not you personally of course), and you will see consistently, that they are on the throttle before you are in every single corner, provided you are not also an alien.

Like you I also wished I had come to a different conclusion. I was really looking forward to developing my tuning garage for GT6, I put a lot of effort into the spit and polish of my presentation to get the most out of my very limited artistic skills. Once I realized that ride height was still messed up, camber didn't work and it seemed the rest of the settings didn't matter much, it took the wind out of my tuning sails pretty quickly. I think I finished around #50 in the SSR5 Seasonal with this tune and felt no excitement at all because the tuning was just a matter of figuring out videogame exploits as opposed to real world tuning. I did one more tune a few weeks later and that was it for me, it just wasn't fun to be doing "video game" tuning.

I agree with this. 👍

I think we're in a "test all" phase by PD. (not that I've been playing hardly)

It's well known that in GT5/6, again as has been mentioned here as well, that corner exit speed and getting on the throttle as early as possible is the single biggest factor in achieving alien speed. Take an alien's replay from any TT, compare it to yours (not you personally of course), and you will see consistently, that they are on the throttle before you are in every single corner, provided you are not also an alien.

But I don't understand why you think that's exclusive to GT.
I will grant you that "out-braking" is considerably more difficult in GT, due to ease of ABS, but the mathematical timing of early acceleration is correct in the game. It is a necessity for quick laps in any situation of racing.

 

[PJTierney]

Alright guys, as painful as it was for me to do this due to the fact that I am fresh out of the hospital and all stitched up , I just sat through 5 hours of testing to bring some numbers to the table. First, let me say that when PD announced some updates ago that they fixed the camber issue, I was one of the few people who believed that it was indeed fixed...to an extent. I still believe that. I did loads of testing back then to come to my conclusion, I did not just take PD's word that it was fixed. With this most recent update in regards to camber further being tweaked, I have not felt any difference compared to the update where they fixed it, everything feels and works the same as it did after that update, in my opinion. I would further like to say that I am not claiming my findings here to be fact, only how I see things from my point of view after all the testing I have done in the game in regards to this issue. After the "camber" update, if you will, I tested 3 cars of each drivetrain of various power levels. I cannot begin to tell you how thorough I was in my testing after that update. I feel that I left no stone unturned in coming to my conclusion. I say this because this time around, I have only had time to do this one in depth test with this one car so far, but that's enough for me to come to the same conclusion I came to back at the original "camber" update. Like I said earlier, I believe that camber is indeed fixed for the most part. I more less just did this test so I would have some numbers to bring to the table. Ok, about the test.

I wanted to take out as many variables as I could, so this is how I went about it. I had my daughter help me with this test. Her job was to punch in the camber numbers into the suspension setting without me knowing which ones I was driving in each session. This was done in order to take out the element of me knowing which settings I was driving and when, just trying to take out as much of the human "mind over matter" element that I could. She filled in the chart that I had made as we went. I used a low powered car at a short track to minimized as much of the drivers input as I could: minimal throttle/brake/steering input and the like. I also used automatic transmission to take out any shifting variables. With this, I was able to pretty much replicate each lap exactly in regards to inputs and driving line, I was very constant with my inputs in this test. Here are the rest of the parameters. Each session was 6 laps.

Car: Honda S500 '63
Tires: Stock (CM)
Parts added: Suspension (stock except for camber settings) Trans (Stock)
No oil change
Track: Tsukuba
Time: 15:30
Temp. 73 degrees F
Grip Reduction: Real

Test Results

• 0.0/0.0 1'24.435 BASE TIME
• 4.0/0.0 1'24.822
• 3.0/0.0 1'24.783
• 2.0/0.0 1'24.415
• 1.0/0.0 1'24.214 Fastest time with front camber
• 0.0/4.0 1'24.633
• 0.0/3.0 1'24.364
• 0.0/2.0 1'24.132 Fastest time with rear camber
• 0.0/1.0 1'24.229
• 1.0/1.0 1'24.313
• 2.0/2.0 1'24.233
• 3.0/3.0 1'24.516
• 4.0/4.0 1'24.997

So, now knowing where my possible sweet spot for front and rear camber was, I further tweaked the camber values and ended up with 0.6/2.2 with a time of 1'24.129. To further validate this and while I was still in the groove, I went and re-ran 0.0/0.0 camber again ending up with a time of 1'24.407. So, as you can see, my numbers here back up my beliefs, camber works and is not broken. Knowing these numbers, I can now apply them, with a few adjustments, into a stable, fast, and competitive tune.

In closing, I would just like to once again say that I am in no way claiming my findings to be fact, but only what I believe to be true through my own testing. Now, its been a long day, I'm off to rest now. Happy Holidays everyone.

This is good analysis, has anyone else done some "blind testing" and got numbers to share?

 

[Johnnypenso]

But I don't understand why you think that's exclusive to GT.
I will grant you that "out-braking" is considerably more difficult in GT, due to ease of ABS, but the mathematical timing of early acceleration is correct in the game. It is a necessity for quick laps in any situation of racing.

It's not exclusive to GT, but the tuning you do in GT to get a car to increase exit speed doesn't parallel real life or even other sim games. Ballast on the back, high front/low rear, no camber, often wacky toe/damper settings. In GT6 you don't really drive like a real racer would, you almost drift the car into position in a controlled fashion because nothing seems to matter except how early you hit the throttle. If I tuned a car in other games like I did in GT I'd be hard pressed to be anything close to competitive

The idea is correct, it's the execution of it I find lacking.

 

[super_gt]

@Voodoovaj

Twin Ring Motegi Oval
Mazda Roadster RS(NC)'07

No oil change,no AIDS no ABS
Stock except toe angle front 0.00 rear 0.00 and six speed gearbox.
Both corners flat out(full throttle) in sixth gear.
Front sports hard rear sports hard tires.
I did 20 laps with each setup.

Camber front 0.0 rear 0.0
44.766 seconds

Camber front 0.3 rear 0.0
44.750 seconds

This test is made offline with DFGT steering wheel

 

[photonrider]

An oval is fine for testing camber when it has very little to no banking, so motegi is fine. I actually said that in my post if you had read it.

If the 'you' in this para is me, then - sorry - no, I don't need to read your post (or any others about 'GT camber') to express my surprise and humour that people are questioning the fact that:

If you have negative camber on both sides of the front on a banked corner, the outside tire's thrust inward will not be able to overcome the inside tire's thrust outward.

to the point that a poster has to say that well into a discussion on camber.

The contact patch (if not the actual 'camber' ) is affected by all surfaces it is in contact with at any given point in time.
Unless the car is on the hoist.

How does that relate to what Voodoovaj was saying?

You'll figure it out. Give it time.

 

[Mike_grpA]

I'll say again, if camber was fixed, we wouldn't even need to have a discussion about it. It would be plainly obvious, and everyone would be able to easily see the benefits. As it is, the only people reporting a benefit to using camber are reporting one or two tenths difference, while others are reporting much bigger benefits to 0/0. The ones reporting a couple of tenths gained with camber are also the ones saying only tiny amounts of camber are beneficial.

Look at any race engineering web site or car club forum, where they do track days together. Even mildly modified road cars, that people are taking to track days, are running more than 2 degrees negative camber on the front. Race cars rarely run less than 4 degrees on the front.

Anyway, I won't bother debating it any more. All the quickest tunes, from the best tuners, have 0/0 camber still, just like how they all have other odd settings, like high front/low rear, or massive negative rear toe, so it's not like camber is the only thing that pd stuffed up.

Peace

 

[ALB123]

Seeing how I never played a Gran Turismo title before I picked up GT6, could someone tell me how Camber worked in GT5? Was it beneficial? Did people apply amounts similar to real world applications? Was 0/0 the fastest setup in GT5?

 

[CSLACR]

It's not exclusive to GT, but the tuning you do in GT to get a car to increase exit speed doesn't parallel real life or even other sim games. Ballast on the back, high front/low rear, no camber, often wacky toe/damper settings. In GT6 you don't really drive like a real racer would, you almost drift the car into position in a controlled fashion because nothing seems to matter except how early you hit the throttle. If I tuned a car in other games like I did in GT I'd be hard pressed to be anything close to competitive

The idea is correct, it's the execution of it I find lacking.

Ok so it's just that we're very disagreed on the "why" portion of how the tunes end up. (I don't think it's just for "exit traction", it's much more entwined and incorrect imo)
As for sliding into a corner full-tilt on the brakes, that's been a GT fallacy for a long time.

 

[Imari]

You'll figure it out. Give it time.

Ah, so you're bent on joining him in being an arse, I see.

God forbid anyone should actually share some knowledge and enlighten their fellow man around here. That you're repeating what Voodoovaj said would seem to indicate that his words have some meaning that are not what I think they are.

Say we're going around a left hand banking. The outside wheel on the right is pushing the car left, and the inside wheel on the left is pushing the car right.

Now it seems to me that what Voodoovaj said means that the thrust from the outside wheel cannot be greater than the thrust from the inside wheel. I can see how in some situations that might be true, but I can't see how it would be true in all situations. And I don't see how an article about adding negative camber to the outside rear of NASCARS with an asymmetric setup tells me anything about this situation at all.

Now this seems fairly fundamental to how camber works, so if I've got this wrong then I've probably getting it all wrong. How's about being a nice guy and helping out someone who may genuinely not understand and wants to extend their knowledge?

 

[rams1de]

Seeing how I never played a Gran Turismo title before I picked up GT6, could someone tell me how Camber worked in GT5? Was it beneficial? Did people apply amounts similar to real world applications? Was 0/0 the fastest setup in GT5?

Yes it was beneficial to handling and lap times.

You'd generally see between 1.5 and 3 degrees of camber on sports tyres. Higher on the front than rear except for some MR and RR cars. The Amuse S2000 R1 came with 4 degrees camber stock and it handled like dream, although if you tried that much on most other cars times the handling ng would suffer markedly.

I don't recall any great debate on camber, iirc in GT5 the bickering was mostly over ride height and spring rates being reversed.

 

[ALB123]

Yes it was beneficial to handling and lap times.

You'd generally see between 1.5 and 3 degrees of camber on sports tyres. Higher on the front than rear except for some MR and RR cars. The Amuse S2000 R1 came with 4 degrees camber stock and it handled like dream, although if you tried that much on most other cars times the handling ng would suffer markedly.

I don't recall any great debate on camber, iirc in GT5 the bickering was mostly over ride height and spring rates being reversed.

Ahh.. I wonder why they haven't been able to get a handle on Camber in over a year then. I've read most people here on GTP believe the overall physics have improved since GT5, then why have they turned Camber into such a disaster? Very strange...since they seem to have had it implemented much truer to real life in GT5.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Ahh.. I wonder why they haven't been able to get a handle on Camber in over a year then. I've read most people here on GTP believe the overall physics have improved since GT5, then why have they turned Camber into such a disaster? Very strange...since they seem to have had it implemented much truer to real life in GT5.

Whether physics have improved is debatable IMO. Cars "feel" better with a wheel but when you get into specifics it's a grey area. Ride height is still backwards. Camber doesn't work either like real camber or like GT5 and it's hard to go wrong with 0/0 in every situation. They changed the grip dynamics and shifted much of it into the tire model and out of the chassis as it was in GT5 but IMO many of the older cars stick to the track far too well relative to modern cars on the same tire. Of course this is only an issue if you look at it as a sim where you are trying to simulate the grip of a 1960's bias ply tire. If you think of it as a sports hard is a sports hard regardless of the era then it's fine. There are top speed/aerodynamic issues. ABS doesn't really work like ABS, brake release oversteer is still there...etc.

Cars feel better, weight transfer is probably better, loss of grip is more progressive for the most part but there are still plenty of issues that need to be worked out in GT7 for GT to truly be a "sim" IMO

 

[0ldman279]

On topic of the tires, you can put modern tires and wheels on old cars, so I don't mind having new tech on old cars in that regard.

I do wish they had more detailed options on a lot of things, tires being one, actual engine internals for another.

The options available on the Mach 1 increase torque as much as HP. I'd prefer to build one myself, keep the torque comparatively low and raise the RPM, makes the car easier to control.

More options would be nice...

 

[OdeFinn]

ABS doesn't really work like ABS, brake release oversteer is still there.

Can you explain this, I didn't get what you ment? (Not picking, just curious)

 

[trustjab]

This is by no means scientific, but with my regular setup on the vw w12 nardo, I was doing 53.7 at best on the Tsukuba 600pp seasonal. I did like the way it drove, it felt great. I added camber, 0.4 front 0.6 rear ended up being the fastest with the same setup as 0.0 camber. I went from 53.7 to 52.9 Car was much easier to get out of turn one and turn 4 (before the bridge). If I went further in camber the car became 'too responsive' and wanted to oversteer.

 

[Stotty]

Can you explain this, I didn't get what you ment? (Not picking, just curious)

Brake release oversteer when using ABS...

Car is super stable when trail braking in to a turn, but oversteers suddenly if the brake pressure is released too quickly.

 

[OdeFinn]

Brake release oversteer when using ABS...

Car is super stable when trail braking in to a turn, but oversteers suddenly if the brake pressure is released too quickly.

Sounds LSD related problem more than bug.
(Too high brake and/or initial)

 

[Stotty]

Sounds LSD related problem more than bug.
(Too high brake and/or initial)

You can control it with brake balance and LSD decel (and +ve rear toe if it's really extreme), but it is an error in the physics engine.

If you're trail braking in a real car and you release the brake, the weight shifts away from the front and you should get understeer as a result.

 

[OdeFinn]

You can control it with brake balance and LSD decel (and +ve rear toe if it's really extreme), but it is an error in the physics engine.

If you're trail braking in a real car and you release the brake, the weight shifts away from the front and you should get understeer as a result.

Yes and no, high torque and paddle shifting means instant lock on rear when releasing brake. Higher torque= higher engine brake, even on GT6. So hitting on high torque rev area while releasing brake means that oversteer due rear lockup.

Using twin plate clutch or original this is not happening so bad, it slips clutch during that.

ABS is Über on GT6, not saying it works as on real world, too clinical.